Ethics in psychological research | AQA A-Level Psychology Revision
- Revision Notes
- Aug 4
- 18 min read
Updated: Aug 23
For 7182 specification, first teach in September 2025
AQA A-Level Psychology | Free Revision Notes
Estimated study time: 60 minutes
Psychologists must balance the value of research against their responsibility to protect participants. This Ethics in psychological research A-Level Psychology revision page explains the role of the British Psychological Society’s code of ethics, the ethical issues that may arise when psychological studies are designed and conducted, and practical ways researchers can address them. Ethical decisions are an essential part of research planning because a procedure may be scientifically useful but unacceptable if it exposes participants to unnecessary risk or fails to respect their rights.
Learning Objectives 🎯
By the end of this revision page, you should be able to:
Explain the role of the British Psychological Society’s code of ethics.
Identify ethical issues in unfamiliar psychological investigations.
Explain how consent, deception, protection from harm, privacy and confidentiality may affect research.
Explain participants’ right to withdraw from an investigation.
Suggest practical ways of dealing with ethical issues.
Apply and justify appropriate ethical procedures in research scenarios.
Revision Notes 📚
What are ethics in psychological research?
Ethics concern the principles used to judge whether the design and conduct of an investigation are acceptable.
Psychological research frequently involves people. Researchers may ask participants to:
Complete unfamiliar tasks.
Discuss personal experiences.
Answer sensitive questions.
Be observed in social situations.
Experience changes to their normal environment.
Take part without being told the full research aim in advance.
Researchers must consider whether their procedures respect participants’ rights and protect their wellbeing.
Ethical planning begins before data collection. It should be considered when developing the method, sample and procedure of a study and followed throughout the practical collection of psychological data.
The British Psychological Society
The British Psychological Society, usually abbreviated to BPS, is a professional organisation for psychology in the United Kingdom.
The AQA specification requires students to understand the role of the BPS code of ethics in the design and conduct of psychological studies.
The code provides a framework that helps psychologists:
Recognise potential ethical problems.
Consider participants’ rights and wellbeing.
Plan procedures that reduce unnecessary risks.
Decide whether proposed research is ethically acceptable.
Conduct research responsibly.
Respond appropriately if an unexpected ethical problem occurs.
The code does not replace the researcher’s judgement. Researchers must apply ethical principles to the particular participants, method and procedure involved.
The role of an ethical code
A code of ethics establishes agreed expectations for responsible research.
Its role includes:
Protecting participants
The code encourages researchers to consider the possible effects of the procedure on the people taking part.
Protection may include:
Providing appropriate information.
Avoiding unnecessary physical or psychological harm.
Respecting decisions about participation.
Protecting personal information.
Allowing participants to leave.
Explaining the research afterwards where necessary.
Guiding researchers
Ethical principles help researchers identify problems before the main study begins.
A researcher can ask:
Do participants understand what they are agreeing to?
Is any information being withheld?
Could the task cause distress or embarrassment?
Can participants leave without pressure?
Is private information being collected?
How will identities and data be protected?
What explanation will be provided afterwards?
Supporting consistent standards
An ethical code gives psychologists a common framework for judging research. This reduces the likelihood that each researcher will rely entirely on their own personal view of what is acceptable.
Supporting confidence in psychological research
Responsible treatment of participants is important for trust in psychology. If participants believe they may be misled, harmed or exposed publicly without appropriate safeguards, they may be less willing to take part in future research.
Ethical decision-making
Ethical issues are not always solved by applying one simple rule.
Researchers may need to balance:
The potential value of the study.
The level and likelihood of risk.
The information participants need before agreeing.
Whether giving full information would affect behaviour.
Whether the same research question could be investigated using a less risky procedure.
What safeguards could reduce the ethical concern.
Researchers should not assume that a scientifically useful study is automatically ethical.
They should also not assume that following a single procedure, such as obtaining a signature, deals with every ethical issue.
Informed consent
Informed consent means that participants receive sufficient relevant information about the investigation to make a voluntary decision about taking part.
Participants should understand what participation is likely to involve before agreeing.
Relevant information may include:
The general nature of the activity.
What participants will be asked to do.
The expected duration.
Any foreseeable discomfort or risk.
How information will be recorded and used.
The right to withdraw.
How confidentiality will be protected.
Consent should be freely given. A participant should not be pressured into taking part.
Why informed consent matters
Without appropriate information, a person may agree to a procedure that they would have rejected if they had understood what it involved.
Consent respects the participant’s ability to decide whether participation is acceptable.
It also allows participants to prepare for practical aspects of the investigation, such as:
The time required.
The type of task involved.
Whether personal questions will be asked.
Whether responses will be recorded.
Difficulties with informed consent
Giving participants complete information may sometimes reveal the research aim.
This can create demand characteristics, because participants may alter their behaviour once they know what the researcher expects.
For example, telling participants that an experiment investigates whether praise improves persistence may cause them to change how long they attempt the task.
Researchers must balance the need for meaningful consent against the need to avoid revealing unnecessary information that would undermine the investigation.
This tension connects with participants changing their behaviour in response to research
Ways of dealing with consent
Informed consent
Participants are given relevant information and actively agree to take part.
This is the clearest approach where the research can be described without undermining its purpose.
Presumptive consent
A similar group of people is asked whether they believe the proposed procedure would be acceptable. The researcher assumes that the actual participants would probably make the same decision.
Presumptive consent may help when informing the actual participants fully would reveal the aim.
However, the views of one group may not perfectly represent the views of the actual participants.
Prior general consent
Participants agree in advance to take part in a range of studies, including some in which the full aim may not be revealed initially.
The agreement should make clear the general type of research to which participants are consenting.
This does not give researchers unlimited permission to use any procedure. Participants still require protection and the ability to withdraw.
Retrospective consent
After the true nature of the study has been explained, participants are asked whether they consent to their data being used.
This gives participants an opportunity to reject the use of their data once they understand the full purpose and procedure.
Retrospective consent occurs after participation, so it does not remove any distress already experienced during the study.
Deception
Deception occurs when participants are deliberately misled or important information about the investigation is withheld.
Deception may involve:
Giving a false explanation of the study’s purpose.
Hiding the true hypothesis.
Using misleading task instructions.
Presenting a situation as genuine when it has been arranged by the researcher.
Failing to reveal the role of another person involved in the procedure.
Researchers may consider deception when knowing the true aim would cause participants to alter their behaviour.
Why deception is an ethical issue
Deception prevents participants from making a fully informed decision.
It may also lead to:
Embarrassment.
Distress.
Anger.
Loss of trust.
Concern about the participant’s own behaviour.
Suspicion about future psychological research.
The effect depends on the nature of the deception. Withholding a minor detail is different from creating a situation that causes substantial fear or humiliation.
Dealing with deception
Researchers should consider whether deception is genuinely necessary.
Possible safeguards include:
Withholding only the information that must remain unknown.
Avoiding deception that could cause significant harm.
Using the least misleading procedure capable of testing the aim.
Explaining the true purpose as soon as practical.
Giving participants an opportunity to ask questions.
Seeking retrospective consent for the use of data.
Allowing participants to withdraw their data after the explanation.
A debrief is particularly important when deception has been used.
Debriefing
A debrief is an explanation provided to participants after their involvement in the investigation.
A debrief may:
Reveal the true aim.
Explain why information was withheld.
Correct false beliefs created by the procedure.
Reassure participants about their behaviour or responses.
Remind participants of confidentiality.
Explain how the findings will be used.
Give participants an opportunity to ask questions.
Restate the right to withdraw data.
Provide appropriate information about support where necessary.
The limits of debriefing
A debrief does not automatically make an unethical procedure acceptable.
For example, explaining afterwards that distress was part of the study does not remove distress already experienced.
Researchers must consider the likely effects before conducting the study rather than relying on debriefing to repair every problem afterwards.
A good exam answer may therefore state that debriefing can reduce misunderstanding or continuing distress, but cannot erase harm that has already occurred.
Protection from harm
Researchers should protect participants from unnecessary physical and psychological harm.
Potential psychological harm could include:
Stress.
Anxiety.
Fear.
Embarrassment.
Humiliation.
Loss of confidence.
Unwanted memories.
Concern about personal performance.
Distress caused by sensitive questions.
Potential physical harm could arise from a procedure that creates fatigue, discomfort or another foreseeable physical risk.
Judging acceptable risk
Researchers should consider whether participants are exposed to a greater level of risk than would ordinarily be expected in comparable everyday activities.
The exact decision depends on:
The nature of the task.
The duration of exposure.
The likelihood of harm.
The seriousness of possible harm.
The characteristics of the participants.
The safeguards available.
Researchers should select a less risky procedure where it can answer the same research question adequately.
Dealing with potential harm
Researchers may:
Conduct a risk assessment before the study.
Remove unnecessarily distressing tasks.
Reduce the intensity or duration of a procedure.
Pilot materials to identify unexpected reactions.
Monitor participants for signs of discomfort.
Provide a clear method for stopping the procedure.
Remind participants that they may withdraw.
Stop the investigation if continued participation is unsafe.
Debrief participants carefully.
Provide information about appropriate support where required.
A small-scale trial can reveal practical and ethical problems before the full investigation. This links to testing and improving the proposed procedure.
Right to withdraw
The right to withdraw means participants should be able to leave the investigation without being pressured to continue.
Participants should also be told whether they may ask for their data to be removed.
The right to withdraw is important because:
A participant may become uncomfortable.
The task may be more demanding than expected.
Personal circumstances may change.
A participant may no longer wish their responses to be used.
Consent must remain voluntary throughout the procedure.
Threats to the right to withdraw
The right may be weakened if:
Participants are told they must finish.
The researcher repeatedly persuades them to remain.
Payment depends unfairly on completing every stage.
The withdrawal procedure is not explained.
Participants believe leaving will disappoint the researcher.
Data cannot be identified for removal even though removal was promised.
Protecting the right to withdraw
Researchers should:
Explain the right before participation.
Repeat it where the procedure is lengthy or demanding.
Avoid language that pressures participants.
Provide a clear way to stop the task.
Explain how participants can request data removal.
Use participant codes so that data can be located without displaying names.
Make clear whether any payment or reward is affected by withdrawal.
Participants should not have to justify their decision to leave.
Privacy
Privacy concerns a person’s control over access to themselves, their behaviour and their personal information.
An ethical issue may arise when researchers observe or record behaviour that participants reasonably expect to remain private.
Researchers should consider:
Where the behaviour takes place.
Whether the setting is public or private.
Whether people expect to be observed.
What type of information is recorded.
Whether recordings could reveal identity.
Whether the research intrudes into personal matters.
Privacy in observations
Observational research creates particular concerns because people may not know that their behaviour is being recorded.
For example, observation in a private setting may involve a greater invasion of privacy than observation of behaviour openly visible in a public setting.
Researchers should avoid assuming that every behaviour occurring in public is automatically acceptable to record and publish. The sensitivity of the behaviour and the possibility of identification still matter.
These decisions are connected to naturalistic, controlled, covert and overt observations
Confidentiality
Confidentiality means protecting information provided by participants and preventing unauthorised disclosure.
Researchers may collect:
Names.
Contact details.
Questionnaire responses.
Interview recordings.
Test scores.
Observational records.
Personal experiences.
Other sensitive information.
Participants should be told how this information will be stored, used and reported.
Privacy and confidentiality compared
Privacy | Confidentiality |
Concerns access to a person or their behaviour | Concerns the handling of information after it has been obtained |
May be affected when behaviour is observed without appropriate justification | May be affected when data are disclosed or linked to an identifiable person |
Focuses on whether the researcher should observe or collect the information | Focuses on how collected information is protected |
The two issues may occur together but should not be treated as identical.
Protecting confidentiality
Researchers can protect confidentiality by:
Replacing names with participant numbers or codes.
Removing identifying details from reports.
Limiting access to the data.
Storing records securely.
Reporting combined results rather than individual identities.
Explaining how recordings will be used.
Avoiding descriptions that make individuals recognisable.
Destroying identifying information when it is no longer required.
Anonymity
Anonymity means that a participant’s identity is not attached to the data available for analysis or reporting.
Using participant codes may reduce identification, although a separate record connecting names and codes must also be protected if one exists.
Researchers should not promise complete anonymity if the procedure requires them to retain identifying information. They should describe the protection accurately.
Sensitive questions
Questionnaires and interviews may ask participants about personal experiences, beliefs or behaviour.
Ethical problems may arise if questions:
Cause embarrassment or distress.
Request information that is not necessary.
Pressure participants to disclose personal experiences.
Make participants believe they must answer every item.
Collect identifiable information without appropriate protection.
Researchers should:
Include only relevant questions.
Use clear and respectful wording.
Allow participants to leave questions unanswered where appropriate.
Explain confidentiality.
Avoid collecting unnecessary identifying information.
Pilot questions to identify unexpected distress or ambiguity.
These considerations are especially relevant when constructing self-report measures and planning structured or unstructured interviews.
Ethical issues in experimental research
Experiments may raise ethical issues when the researcher manipulates a situation or exposes participants to an unfamiliar task.
Possible concerns include:
Deception about the true aim.
Stress caused by difficult tasks.
Embarrassment about poor performance.
Pressure to continue.
Unequal or unfair treatment between conditions.
Collection of identifiable performance data.
Failure to explain the procedure afterwards.
Researchers should consider whether the manipulation is necessary and whether the same aim could be investigated using a less demanding procedure.
Ethical issues in observational research
Observations may create concerns about:
Consent.
Privacy.
Covert recording.
Identifiability.
Sensitive behaviour.
Publication of information about individuals or groups.
A covert observation may reduce demand characteristics because participants do not know they are being observed. However, it also creates ethical concerns because consent has not been obtained.
This illustrates that a methodological strength may create an ethical weakness.
Ethical issues in self-report research
Questionnaires and interviews may involve:
Sensitive topics.
Pressure to disclose information.
Identifiable responses.
Misleading explanations of the aim.
Interviewer behaviour that makes participants uncomfortable.
Uncertainty about whether questions can be skipped.
Researchers should make participation voluntary and explain how responses will be protected.
Ethical issues in case studies
Case studies may contain detailed information about one person or a small group.
Even when names are changed, unusual personal details could make the individual recognisable.
Researchers should carefully consider:
Which details are necessary.
How identifying information will be removed.
Who will have access to records.
How the case will be described publicly.
Whether consent remains appropriate as the investigation develops.
Ethical considerations during recruitment
Ethical treatment begins when participants are recruited.
Researchers should avoid:
Misleading advertisements that conceal important practical demands.
Pressure from teachers, employers or authority figures.
Making participation appear compulsory.
Offering incentives that create unreasonable pressure.
Failing to explain the time commitment.
A volunteer may still feel unable to refuse if the request comes from someone with authority over them.
Ethical considerations during data collection
During the investigation, researchers should:
Follow the agreed procedure.
Monitor participant wellbeing.
Respect withdrawal decisions.
Avoid unplanned pressure or humiliation.
Protect responses from being seen by others.
Keep recordings secure.
Respond appropriately to unexpected problems.
A researcher should not continue simply because stopping would make data collection inconvenient.
Ethical considerations after data collection
Ethical responsibilities continue after participation.
Researchers may need to:
Debrief participants.
Correct misleading information.
Respond to questions.
Remove data where withdrawal has been requested.
Protect stored information.
Report findings without revealing identities.
Avoid misleading descriptions of participants.
Retain or dispose of records appropriately.
Balancing ethical issues and scientific quality
Some procedures used to improve research quality may create ethical concerns.
Concealing the aim
This may reduce demand characteristics but limits informed consent and may involve deception.
Covert observation
This may produce more natural behaviour but creates concerns about consent and privacy.
Difficult or stressful tasks
These may allow the intended behaviour to be studied but could expose participants to psychological harm.
Researchers must consider whether the value of the information justifies the procedure and whether less ethically problematic alternatives are available.
Ethical cost-benefit decisions
Researchers may weigh the possible benefits of a study against its ethical costs.
Possible benefits include:
Increasing psychological understanding.
Improving procedures or interventions.
Informing future research.
Producing knowledge with practical value.
Possible costs include:
Distress.
Loss of privacy.
Deception.
Time and inconvenience.
Damage to trust.
Exposure of sensitive information.
A possible benefit does not automatically justify any level of risk. Researchers should still minimise harm and respect participants’ rights.
Using a pilot study to identify ethical problems
A pilot study may reveal that:
Instructions are more misleading than intended.
A task causes unexpected distress.
Participants do not understand their right to withdraw.
Questions feel intrusive.
A recording method exposes personal information.
The debrief does not answer participants’ concerns.
The procedure takes much longer than expected.
The researcher can then revise the procedure before the main study.
However, a pilot should itself be conducted ethically. Researchers should not expose pilot participants to unacceptable risks simply to discover whether the procedure is harmful.
Standardisation and ethics
Standardisation can help researchers apply ethical protections consistently.
A standardised procedure may include:
A consistent consent explanation.
A reminder of the right to withdraw.
An agreed response if a participant becomes distressed.
A secure system for labelling data.
A prepared debrief.
A procedure for requesting data removal.
This links to using standardised procedures to improve consistency.
Ethical issue, consequence and solution
A strong application answer should connect three elements:
The ethical issue.
Why it is a problem in the scenario.
A practical way of dealing with it.
Ethical issue | Possible consequence | Appropriate procedure |
Participants do not know what the task involves | Consent may not be adequately informed | Provide relevant information before agreement |
The true aim is concealed | Participants are misled | Use only necessary deception, followed by a full debrief |
A task causes substantial anxiety | Participants may experience psychological harm | Reduce the task’s intensity and allow immediate withdrawal |
Participants are told they must finish | The right to withdraw is restricted | State clearly that they may stop without penalty |
Personal responses are displayed with names | Confidentiality is breached | Use participant codes and remove identifying details |
Behaviour is secretly recorded in a private setting | Privacy and consent are threatened | Obtain consent or redesign the observation |
Participants remain confused after the study | Misunderstanding may continue | Provide a clear debrief and answer questions |
Applying ethics to an unfamiliar scenario
Consider the following investigation:
A psychologist recruits students to complete an extremely difficult intelligence test. Students are told that the test accurately measures their ability and that they must finish because their teacher has agreed to the study. Their names and scores are displayed on a classroom noticeboard. The test has actually been designed to be impossible, but this is not explained afterwards.
Several ethical issues are present.
Informed consent
Students have not been given accurate information about the test.
Deception
They are falsely told that the test measures their intelligence accurately.
Protection from harm
An impossible test presented as an intelligence measure could cause embarrassment or loss of confidence.
Right to withdraw
Students are told they must finish, which places pressure on them to continue.
Confidentiality
Names and individual scores are displayed publicly.
Debriefing
The true nature of the test is not explained afterwards.
Improving the scenario
The researcher should:
Explain the practical nature of the task before participation.
Avoid falsely presenting the task as a valid measure of intelligence.
Remove unnecessary deception or justify and minimise it.
Make clear that participation and continued involvement are voluntary.
Stop the task if a participant becomes distressed.
Replace names with codes.
Keep individual scores confidential.
Explain the true purpose afterwards.
Allow participants to withdraw their data.
Ethics and research evaluation
When evaluating a study, avoid stating only:
The study was unethical.
This is too vague.
A stronger response identifies the specific issue and its consequence:
Participants were told that they had to continue, so their right to withdraw was restricted. This could place pressure on participants who became uncomfortable during the task.
Where the question asks for an improvement, add a practical solution:
The researcher should explain before the task that participants may stop at any time without giving a reason or losing any agreed reward.
Ethics in psychological research A-Level Psychology revision: command words
Identify
Name the ethical issue shown in the scenario.
Example:
The right to withdraw.
Explain
Show why the procedure creates an ethical problem.
Example:
Participants were told that they must finish, so they may feel unable to leave even if they become distressed.
Suggest
Give a practical way of addressing the issue.
Example:
Participants should be told before and during the task that they may stop at any time.
Justify
Explain why the suggested procedure is suitable.
Example:
This would help ensure that continued participation remains voluntary.
Evaluate
Consider the ethical strength or weakness and its implications for the investigation.
Planning an ethical investigation
Researchers should consider the following questions:
What information should participants receive before agreeing?
Is any deception necessary?
Could the procedure cause physical or psychological harm?
How will the right to withdraw be communicated?
Does the study intrude on privacy?
How will confidentiality and anonymity be protected?
Are any questions unnecessarily sensitive?
How will unexpected distress be managed?
What information will be included in the debrief?
Can participants request removal of their data?
How will records be stored and reported?
Could a less ethically problematic procedure answer the same research question?
Ethics should be built into the design rather than added after the investigation has already been planned.
Key Words 🔑
Key word | Student-friendly definition | How it may be used in an exam |
Ethics | Principles used to judge whether research is designed and conducted responsibly. | Identify or evaluate concerns in a research scenario. |
British Psychological Society | A professional organisation for psychology in the UK whose ethical code guides responsible research. | Explain the role of the BPS code of ethics. |
BPS code of ethics | A framework that helps psychologists identify and deal with ethical issues. | Explain how researchers should plan and conduct studies responsibly. |
Informed consent | Voluntary agreement based on sufficient relevant information about participation. | Explain what participants should know before agreeing. |
Presumptive consent | Asking a similar group whether the proposed procedure would be acceptable. | Suggest an approach where informing actual participants fully may reveal the aim. |
Prior general consent | Agreement in advance to take part in a range of research procedures described in general terms. | Explain one way of preparing participants for research where some information may be withheld. |
Retrospective consent | Consent requested after the true nature of the study has been explained. | Suggest a procedure after deception has been revealed. |
Deception | Deliberately misleading participants or withholding important information. | Identify a false explanation or concealed purpose. |
Debriefing | Explaining the study to participants after their involvement. | Suggest how misunderstanding or deception should be addressed. |
Protection from harm | The responsibility to avoid unnecessary physical or psychological harm. | Identify risks and propose safeguards. |
Right to withdraw | The participant’s right to leave and, where appropriate, request removal of their data. | Explain how participation can remain voluntary. |
Privacy | A person’s control over access to themselves, their behaviour and personal information. | Evaluate an observational or recording procedure. |
Confidentiality | Protecting participant information from unauthorised disclosure. | Suggest secure handling and reporting of data. |
Anonymity | Keeping a participant’s identity separate from the data used or reported. | Suggest the use of codes and removal of identifying details. |
Risk assessment | Consideration of possible harm before an investigation takes place. | Explain how researchers can anticipate and reduce risks. |
Ethical issue | A feature of research that may threaten participants’ rights, dignity or wellbeing. | Apply ethical knowledge to an unfamiliar scenario. |
Common Mistakes ⚠️
Mistake: Referring only to “ethics” without naming the issue.
Why this is incorrect:The response does not identify whether the concern involves consent, harm, withdrawal, privacy, confidentiality or another ethical issue.
How to improve:Use the precise ethical term and connect it to the scenario.
Mistake: Saying that signing a consent form solves every ethical problem.
Why this is incorrect:Consent does not remove the researcher’s responsibility to prevent harm, protect confidentiality and respect withdrawal.
How to improve:Consider each ethical issue separately.
Mistake: Assuming consent is informed simply because a participant agreed.
Why this is incorrect:Participants need sufficient relevant information for their agreement to be informed.
How to improve:Explain what participants should know before deciding.
Mistake: Claiming that all deception is automatically acceptable if participants are debriefed.
Why this is incorrect:A debrief cannot remove harm that has already occurred.
How to improve:Explain why deception is necessary, minimise it and consider whether the procedure could be redesigned.
Mistake: Confusing privacy with confidentiality.
Why this is incorrect:Privacy concerns access to a person or their behaviour. Confidentiality concerns protection of information once it has been obtained.
How to improve:Ask whether the issue is the collection of information or its later handling and disclosure.
Mistake: Saying that participants may withdraw only before the study begins.
Why this is incorrect:The right to withdraw should continue during the investigation. Participants may also be given a way to request removal of their data.
How to improve:Explain how participants can stop and how data withdrawal will be managed.
Mistake: Suggesting that the researcher should make all data public.
Why this is incorrect:Individual identities and sensitive responses must be protected.
How to improve:Report combined findings and remove identifying information.
Mistake: Giving a vague improvement such as “follow the BPS guidelines”.
Why this is incorrect:The answer does not explain what the researcher should actually change.
How to improve:Give a specific procedure, such as providing a debrief, using participant codes or removing an unnecessarily distressing task.
Mistake: Identifying harm without explaining how it could occur.
Why this is incorrect:Application requires the answer to use the details of the research scenario.
How to improve:State how the task, question or researcher behaviour could cause distress, embarrassment or another negative effect.
Exam-Style Questions ✍️
Question 1
What is meant by informed consent? (2 marks)
Question 2
State one role of the British Psychological Society’s code of ethics. (1 mark)
Question 3
Explain one difference between privacy and confidentiality. (2 marks)
Question 4
A psychologist tells participants that they must finish a memory test once they have started.
Identify the ethical issue and explain how the psychologist should deal with it. (3 marks)
Question 5
A researcher conducts a questionnaire about personal experiences of stress. Participants write their names on the questionnaires, which are left on a table where other students can read them.
Explain two ethical issues raised by this procedure. (4 marks)
Question 6
A psychologist secretly records conversations occurring in a private staff room.
Explain one ethical issue raised by this observation and suggest an appropriate way of dealing with it. (4 marks)
Question 7
Participants are told that a task measures intelligence. The task has actually been designed so that nobody can complete it successfully. Some participants become upset about their performance, and the true purpose is not explained afterwards.
Explain two ethical issues in this investigation and suggest one way of dealing with each issue. (6 marks)
Question 8
A psychologist wants to investigate whether people are more helpful when they believe they are being watched. Fully explaining the aim before the investigation may affect participants’ behaviour.
Explain the ethical problem faced by the psychologist. Suggest how consent and debriefing could be managed. (6 marks)
Question 9
A researcher plans an interview about students’ experiences of examination anxiety. The interview will be recorded, and some questions may cause distress.
Design appropriate ethical procedures for this investigation. In your answer, refer to:
Informed consent
Protection from harm
The right to withdraw
Confidentiality
Debriefing
(8 marks)
Question 10
A psychologist plans to observe behaviour during a group activity. Participants will not initially be told the full aim because the researcher is concerned about demand characteristics.
Discuss the ethical issues raised by this investigation and explain how the researcher could deal with them. (8 marks)
Comments